Wild 90 minute police chase of stolen bike ( drug dealers)

[rallycross]

Sorry if this is a repost

Not seen a chase like this for a long time took them 90 mins to stop them ( helicopter chase) bike even stopped for fuel top up mid chase!

Reminds me of the early police stop videos from the 90’s


https://youtu.be/cp8oKO4eHX8?si=TKEoWiL06M-ip3cU

[CoolHands]

Surely illegal use of a taser, if it was indeed shot at him as he runs away.

Got to love the little scrote on the back giving it large to all and sundry as the rider is doing his best to wipe themselves out

[Richtea1970]

CoolHands said:

Surely illegal use of a taser, if it was indeed shot at him as he runs away.

Why would that be illegal use of a taster? Surely that's the whole point to stop them running away.

If it was down to me it would have been a 12 gauge.

[CoolHands]

Yes I wouldn’t object but it was hardly required for defence / a threatening offender was it. The bloke was literally running away!

[Hungrymc]

I’d say the taser was perfectly reasonable to protect everyone involved with the scrote.

Strange point to focus on anyway. Glad the tossers were finally caught. Very soft sentences though.

[KTMsm]

That just demonstrates why the police need motorcycles

How much did that cost ?

[KTMsm]

Here's a much shorter one

https://youtube.com/shorts/W4c5yBTb2Bo?si=nY3HeUsr...

[pcn1]

Natural de-selection will catch up with them one day.
Hopefully.

[HybridTheory]

That's quite some level of control that he was able to ride his bike at that speed with both hands off the bars and texting !

Edited by HybridTheory on Wednesday 16th April 10:18

[Richtea1970]

CoolHands said:

Yes I wouldn’t object but it was hardly required for defence / a threatening offender was it. The bloke was literally running away!

But that's what I'm saying. They are used to stop dangerous offenders from escaping, nothing to do with feeling threatened, it's justified reasonable force.

[CoolHands]

Either I don’t understand or you don’t. This is exactly why many of us don’t want tasers to be expanded to more police officers.

[nute]

Given the guys behaviour in driving the wrong way on a motorway and all the other dangerous things he did taking him off the road and locking him up seems to entirely justify the use of a taser. As above I’d have no issue with the use of a 12g or a one way ticket to Afghanistan. Two completely worthless members of our society.

[Google [bot]]

KTMsm said:

Here's a much shorter one

https://youtube.com/shorts/W4c5yBTb2Bo?si=nY3HeUsr...

That is awesome.

[Jonny_]

Richtea1970 said:

CoolHands said:

Yes I wouldn’t object but it was hardly required for defence / a threatening offender was it. The bloke was literally running away!

But that's what I'm saying. They are used to stop dangerous offenders from escaping, nothing to do with feeling threatened, it's justified reasonable force.

Running away, by riding like an absolute knob at great risk to the general public.

Taser seems pretty tame when you think about the harm that could have been caused to some random uninvolved person.

[Glassman]

CoolHands said:

Surely illegal use of a taser, if it was indeed shot at him as he runs away.

Got to love the little scrote on the back giving it large to all and sundry as the rider is doing his best to wipe themselves out

I have no issue with it whatsoever.

[black-k1]

CoolHands said:

Either I don’t understand or you don’t. This is exactly why many of us don’t want tasers to be expanded to more police officers.

I think I understand both side but I see it as:

1. there was no immediate threat to the officer of the public while the perp was running away

but

2. The perp had shown they had no qualms about putting the public and the police at sever risk so remained a danger

The officer did not know if the perp was armed or not. Had the perp either turned around and stabbed the perusing officer with an as-yet unseen knife, or attacked a member of public in their attempt to escape then there would be challenges as to why the Taser wasn't used.

[Ian Geary]

black-k1 said:

The officer did not know if the perp was armed or not. Had the perp either turned around and stabbed the perusing officer with an as-yet unseen knife, or attacked a member of public in their attempt to escape then there would be challenges as to why the Taser wasn't used.

But that's circular. Saying "oh he might have an unseen weapon so I might be in danger" just legitimises the police's use of force for non threatening situations.


However, my understanding is in the UK, force used by plod must be reasonable and proportionate. There is no requirement for the copper to be "in danger" to use it.

It is a good tool - better than hitting someone's head with a metal stick until they are unconscious.

I recall one police interceptor episode where the plod fired a taser at a guy playing up and the guy just shrugged it off and came at him. The copper nearly shat himself.

Luckily the guy ran off only to be caught by some other police, but generally a taser stops people well so as long as it's used appropriately it helps apprehend suspects more safely.

[P675]

Taser use is not justified, he'll probably get a nice payout from that. They shouldn't be able to get you with it because they are frustrated or just feel like it.

[Glassman]

P675 said:

Taser use is not justified, he'll probably get a nice payout from that. They shouldn't be able to get you with it because they are frustrated or just feel like it.

I approve of stopping the little getting away. The trouble is, the sanctions if convicted don't serve as much of a deterrent so stopping suspects with force just adds to that issue.

[Oilchange]

What's the point in issuing a taser if the officer can't use it?